Delegates met throughout the day in Committees I and II.
Both Committees reviewed issues relating to interpretation and
implementation of the Convention. Contentious issues were
deferred to informal working groups.

COMMITTEE I

RHINOCEROS: The Secretariat introduced a recommendation
repealing a rhinoceros resolution adopted at COP-9 (Doc.
11.32). He noted that the resolution’s implementation status
is difficult to evaluate and provides no reporting mechanism.
The EU and the US supported amending the resolution and
suggested setting up a working group. KENYA and ZIMBABWE
expressed concern over the sovereignty of their rhinoceros
data and suggested African range States meet to discuss the
proposal.

FRESHWATER TURTLES AND TORTOISES IN SOUTHEAST ASIA:
GERMANY introduced a discussion paper addressing conservation
impacts of the increasing turtle trade (Doc. 11.35). The
Secretariat said it would be difficult to support
recommendations of a non-listed species. Many delegates,
including the US, INDONESIA, AUSTRALIA, CHINA, CAMBODIA, the
NETHERLANDS and JAPAN supported further discussion in a
working group.

SEAHORSES: The US introduced a discussion paper
recommending dialogue between Parties and continued species
data collection (Doc. 11.36). BELGIUM, NEW ZEALAND, the EU,
the REPUBLIC OF KOREA, JAMAICA and others, supported
establishing a working group. JAPAN and CHINA noted that CITES
should not concentrate on non-listed species, but agreed to
participate in the working group. The Secretariat added that
significant funding from Parties would be required to work on
non-CITES listed species. The INTERNATIONAL FUND FOR ANIMAL
WELFARE offered funding assistance.

HARD CORAL: The UK presented a previous working group’s
results on identification and reporting requirements for trade
in hard coral (Doc. 11.37). He noted consensus on: ways to
report trade in specimens of hard coral; the importance of
defining and recognizing coral; and reporting to generic
versus specie level. He suggested CITES is not applicable to
non-recognizable species of coral. The Secretariat proposed
creating a working group chaired by the UK, said it was
premature to wave reporting requirements and suggested that
reporting the names of species traded as live specimens would
inspire international cooperation. INDONESIA noted that
applicability of Article IV to sand coral and live rock would
go beyond CITES’ conservation focus.

BIGLEAF MAHOGANY: Reporting on Bigleaf Mahogany (Doc.
11.38.2), BRAZIL noted inter alia: inclusion in
Appendix III is expected to increase international
cooperation; access to markets and fair valuation is needed to
attract funds for sustainable conservation; technology
transfer is essential to enhance forest value; and range
States must cooperate by including their population census in
Appendix III. NICARAGUA noted sub-regional initiatives require
technical and financial assistance from importing countries.
He suggested, and many supported, the creation of a working
group on Mahogany associated with the Plants Committee. The US
offered funding for such a group. The Secretariat suggested
instead, in view of budget constraints, that a draft project
be submitted to range States. BRAZIL said the creation of a
group would be counterproductive.

ASSISTANCE TO SCIENTIFIC AUTHORITIES: The Secretariat
introduced a document (Doc. 11.40) on the need to develop
workshops to improve CITES implementation by Scientific
Authorities and to further develop, in cooperation with IUCN,
a draft manual on making non-detriment findings (Inf. 11.3).
JAPAN, the NETHERLANDS, MAURITIUS, MEXICO, the EU, the US and
others, supported the Secretariat initiative. COSTA RICA
expressed interest in participating in future workshops. EL
SALVADOR suggested the importance of Scientific Authority
regional meetings. VANUATU highlighted the need to include
Pacific island countries. INDIA noted it had started
Scientific Authority capacity-building programmes. The
document was adopted, with the exception of a budget item
deferred to the Budget Committee.

TRANSPORT OF LIVE ANIMALS: The Secretariat reported on
the implementation of resolution 10.21 urging parties
importing live animals to maintain records of live specimens
and casualties per shipment (Doc. 11.54). He said that a lack
of response from Parties to requests for information would
compel COP-12 to amend or repeal the resolution. The EU, the
US and COSTA RICA supported upholding and enforcing the
resolution. GERMANY called for data on casualties during
illegal shipments and suggested the export country attach the
questionnaire to the export document. AUSTRALIA suggested the
absence of records might signify the absence of mortalities.
Delegates agreed to maintain the resolution pending
re-assessment of its effectiveness at COP-12.

APPENDIX II SPECIES SUBJECT TO ANNUAL EXPORT QUOTAS: The
Secretariat reported on the use of export quotas granted to
Ecuador and Tanzania for certain Appendix species (Doc. 11.42)
and noted the source and type of exports were not adequately
reflected.

SIGNIFICANT TRADE IN APPENDIX II SPECIES: The
Secretariat introduced the document (Doc. 11.41.1), which
provides information on the basis for the continuing review of
significant trade in Appendix II species. Several Parties
sought clarification on nomenclature and the status of
implementation on individual species within their country. The
RUSSIAN FEDERATION, with support from IRAN, the US and
SWITZERLAND, submitted a draft resolution for Secretariat
consideration on sturgeon to be distributed at the next
session.

COMMITTEE II

Chair Koester summarized Tuesday’s agreements on the
Permanent Committees’ Terms of Reference (TORs). The
Committee decided to recognize the information paper on
synergy between CITES and FAO (Doc. 11.14), and to invite FAO
to join CITES’ criteria working group.

PERMANENT COMMITTEES TORs: Thomas Althaus
(Switzerland), Permanent Committees working group Chair,
reported that the group had agreed to, inter alia:
amend text to allow Parties to be "consulted" rather
than "informed" on the need for periodic review of
animal species; and nominate two COP-appointed nomenclature
experts, including a zoologist to address animal taxa and a
botanist to address plant taxa. ARGENTINA called to delete
text enabling Plant and Animal Committee Chairs and concerned
range States to withdraw a proposal. No consensus was reached.

SPECIES INTRODUCED FROM THE SEA: AUSTRALIA introduced
its resolution (Doc. 11.18) aiming to: interpret and implement
aspects of CITES Articles III, IV and XIV; reach agreement on
the meaning of "introduction from the sea" and
"not under the jurisdiction of any State"; achieve
synergy with other intergovernmental bodies regulating marine
stocks; and facilitate commerce of marine species under threat
by unregulated and illegal fishing. He outlined potential
problems such as confusion of differentiating territorial
waters from Exclusive Economic Zones, philosophical opposition
on the part of some Parties, and highlighted the certificate
reporting requirements contained in the resolution. The US,
CANADA, GERMANY, BRAZIL, the EU, TRAFFIC and the CENTRE FOR
INTERNATIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL LAW, welcomed the resolution and
said some technical matters should be addressed. JAPAN and the
INTERNATIONAL COOALITION FOR FISHERIES ASSOCIATIONS suggested
the resolution was an effort to resurrect the COP-10 marine
species working group and opposed the resolution along with
ICELAND, NORWAY and CUBA. A working group was established.

NATIONAL REPORTS: Discussion focused on draft decisions
contained in Annex I (Doc. 11.19), which delegates adopted
following a brief discussion on the need for the Secretariat
to assist some Parties to develop national legislation and
prepare annual reports. BELGIUM, supported by TRAFFIC,
underscored the need to distinguish between countries not
submitting annual reports in the last three years and late
submissions.

ENFORCEMENT: The Secretariat introduced a review of
alleged infractions and other implementation problems (Doc.
11.20.1). He highlighted collaboration with ICPO-Interpol and
World Customs Organization (WCO), a new computerized data
system to curb illicit trade and guidelines for permits and
certificates. TRAFFIC suggested compiling information on
infraction trends. Regarding DNA analysis, BELGIUM noted not
all countries have this capacity. The EU, the US, ANTIGUA and
BARBUDA and others expressed support for the guidelines. SPAIN
requested guidelines on identifying false certificates.

NATIONAL LEGISLATION: Regarding the draft decision on
the national legislation project (Doc. 11.21.1), ARGENTINA
proposed text on the need for technical resources for
implementation. ZAMBIA, LIBERIA and TURKEY requested
assistance for capacity building. The EU urged for sanctions
when necessary. ICELAND requested assistance in developing
national legislation, and CUBA requested specific assistance
for small island States. ZIMBABWE asked when a workshop on
harmonizing national legislation at the sub-regional level
would take place. WWF called for funding for regional
workshops.

NATIONAL LAWS FOR IMPLEMENTATION OF CITES: Delegates
noted the efficiency of using limited trade sanctions to
stimulate the development of national legislation (Doc.
11.21.2). A contact group comprising Australia, Germany, the
David Shepard Conservation Foundation and the Secretariat was
requested to harmonize a draft decision favoring trade with
non-CITES Parties with COP-10 resolutions 10.19 and 10.20.

REPORTING SEIZURES: ISRAEL withdrew its proposalon
reporting seizures (Doc. 11.22) to accommodate many delegatesï¿½
concern that it would be redundant with resolution 9.9,
duplicate efforts and possibly create information leakage.

PERSISTENT OFFENDERS: ISRAEL introduced a draft
resolution on persistent offenders of CITES (Doc. 11.23)
recommending that the Secretariat circulate a list of
offenders charged with at least three civil convictions or one
criminal conviction and that Management Authorities withhold
CITES permits from persistent offenders. Several delegations,
including the CZECH REPUBLIC, JAPAN, IRAN, MEXICO, AUSTRALIA,
SAUDI ARABIA, the EU, ANTIGUA and BARBUDA, the WCO and ICPO-INTERPOL,
opposed the resolution, noting, inter alia, such a list
would contradict national legislation and infringe on
sovereignty and individuals rights. The US supported measures
against issuing permits to persistent offenders. DEFENDERS OF
WILDLIFE supported the resolution and ISRAEL invited
interested Parties to cooperate on a revised draft.

WORKING GROUPS

The Working Group, chaired by Hank Jenkins (Australia), on
the Australian-proposed draft resolution to establish a
practical basis for implementing CITES provisions relating to
"introduction from the sea" (species taken from the
high seas), debated the mandate Committee II had intended for
it. Several delegations agreed the group's mandate was to
refine the resolution, while others countered that consensus
to proceed in such a manner had not been achieved. This
division lead to a vote that demonstrated a lack of consensus
on the group's mandate. The group decided to adjourn until
seeking further clarification from Committee II.

IN THE BREEZEWAYS

The controversial suggestion to place trade sanctions on
India to spur its tiger conservation efforts, has left
delegates speculating as to whether this is serious, and, if
so, if the logic isn't just a bit off. Some question whether
the sanction wouldn't be counterproductive, punishing India
instead of providing much needed financial assistance to
address poachers. There is also a sentiment that punishing the
consumers of tiger products would be more appropriate, but
many speculate that power politics prohibit such action. Some
developing countries have hinted that application of trade
sanctions in response to a lack of capacity could isolate such
Parties and encourage them to abandon CITES.

THINGS TO LOOK FOR TODAY

PLENARY:

Plenary will convene at
10:00 am in Conference Room 2 to complete strategic and
administrative matters.

COMMITTEES: Committee I will reconvene at 2:00 pm in
Conference Room 2 to hear reports from working groups on
tigers, rhinoceroses, freshwater turtles and tortoises,
seahorses and coral species. The Russian Federation is
expected to submit text on sturgeons. Committee II will meet
at 2:00 pm in Conference Room 1 to finalize Permanent
Committee TORs, and address risks and benefits of trade in
wildlife and bear specimens. The agenda item on conservation
of and trade in elephants may be transferred to Committee I.
Documents on decisions agreed to on Tuesday will be
circulated.

This issue of the Earth Negotiations Bulletin
ï¿½ <enb@iisd.org> is written and edited by Leanne Burney <leanne@iisd.org>,
Laura Ivers <laurai@iisd.org>, Violette Lacloche <violette@iisd.org>,
Wagaki Mwangi <wags@usa.net> and Mark Schulman <markschulman@hotmail.com>.
The Digital Editor is Andrei Henry <andrei@iisd.org>. The Editor
is Pamela S. Chasek, Ph.D. <pam@iisd.org> and the Managing
Editor is Langston James Goree VI <kimo@iisd.org>. The
Sustaining Donors of the Bulletin are The Netherlands Ministry
of Foreign Affairs, the Government of Canada (through CIDA and DFAIT),
the United States (through USAID), the Swiss Agency for Environment,
Forests and Landscape (SAEFL), the United Kingdom Department for
International Development (DFID) and the European Commission (DG-ENV).
General Support for the Bulletin during 2000 is provided by the
German Federal Ministry of Environment (BMU) and the German Federal
Ministry of Development Cooperation (BMZ), the Danish Ministry of
Foreign Affairs, the Ministry of Environment of Austria, the
Ministries of Foreign Affairs and Environment of Norway, the Ministry
of Foreign Affairs and Ministry of Environment of Finland, the
Government of Sweden, the Government of Australia, the United Nations
Development Programme (UNDP), the Global Environment Facility (GEF)
and BP Amoco. Logistical support has been provided at this meeting by
UNEP and the CITES Secretariat. The Bulletin can be contacted
by e-mail at <enb@iisd.org> and at tel: +1-212-644-0204; fax:
+1-212-644-0206. IISD can be contacted by e-mail at <info@iisd.ca>
and at 161 Portage Avenue East, 6th Floor, Winnipeg, Manitoba R3B 0Y4,
Canada. The opinions expressed in the Earth Negotiations Bulletin
are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of
IISD and other funders. Excerpts from the Earth Negotiations
Bulletin may be used in non-commercial publications only and only
with appropriate academic citation. For permission to use this
material in commercial publications, contact the Managing Editor.
Electronic versions of the Bulletin are sent to e-mail
distribution lists and can be found on the Linkages WWW server at
http://www.iisd.ca/. The satellite image was taken above
Nairobi ï¿½2000 The Living Earth, Inc. http://livingearth.com. For
information on the Earth Negotiations Bulletin, send e-mail to
<enb@iisd.org>.